DOCSLIB.ORG

Status of Mineral Resource Information for the Havasupai Indian Reservation, Arizona

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

STATUS OF MINERAL RESOURCE INFORMATION FOR THE HAVASUPAI INDIAN RESERVATION, ARIZONA By Edward A. duBray Mark H. Hibpschman U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Bureau of Mines Prepared by U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Bureau of Mines for U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs Administrative report BIA-42 1978 CONTENTS SUMMARY..................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1 MAPS.......................................................................... 2 GEOGRAPHY................................................................... 2 PRESENT STUDY AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................... 2 GEOLOGY ..................................................................... 2 Previous Geologic Investigations............................................... 2 Stratigraphy ............................................................... 3 Mississippian........................................................ 3 Redwall Limestone ............................................. 3 Pennsylvanian and Permian............................................. 3 Supai Group................................................... 3 Permian ............................................................ 4 Hermit Shale .................................................. 4 Coconino Sandstone............................................. 4 Toroweap Formation............................................ 4 Kaibab Formation .............................................. 4 Structure.................................................................. 4 Supai Monocline ..................................................... 4 Sinyala Fault ........................................................ 5 MINERAL RESOURCES.......................................................... 5 General................................................................... 5 Energy Resources........................................................... 5 Uranium............................................................ 5 Petroleum, Coal, and Natural Gas........................................ 5 Metallic Minerals ........................................................... 6 Nonmetallic Mineral Resources ................................................ 6 Travertine........................................................... 6 Sand and Gravel...................................................... 6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK ...................................... 6 REFERENCES .................................................................. 7 Status of Mineral Resource Information For The Havasupai Indian Reservation, Arizona Edward A. duBray and Mark H. Hibpschman SUMMARY Section 10(b)5 of the law states: "no commercial timber production, no Known mineral resources on the Havasupai commercial mining or mineral production, Indian Reservation include lead, zinc, silver, and no commercial or industrial develop- vanadium, sand and gravel, travertine, and possibly ment shall be permitted on such lands." uranium. Only travertine and sand and gravel are on the portion of the reservation that can be mined, The only known mineral deposit is located just and the travertine occurs near the scenic falls of north of the 3,058 acres and is described in this Havasu Creek and thus could not be mined for report. aesthetic reasons. Sand and gravel probably will be The tribal council and chairman requested that used by the tribe on an as needed basis. The metal- this report be the only mineral resources report lic ores are on the part of the reservation that is prepared on reservation lands and that no subse- withdrawn from mining by law. quent work be planned concerning mineral re- sources on the reservation. INTRODUCTION The village of Supai, Havasupai tribal head- quarters, is located in Havasu Canyon on the This report was prepared for the U.S. Bureau of original 3,058 acres (Figure 1). According to the Indian Affairs by the U.S. Geological Survey and Bureau of Indian Affairs (1976), the tribal popula- the U.S. Bureau of Mines under an agreement to tion, living on the reservation, is 302. The entire compile and summarize available information on reservation is an area of outstanding scenic attrac- the geology, mineral resources, and potential for tion, and tourism supplies a large part of both tribal mineral development on certain Indian lands. and individual income. Source material consisted of published and unpub- The Supai village is about 75 road miles lished reports, and personal communication. There northeast of Peach Springs, Arizona. U.S. Highway was no field work. 66 and the Santa Fe Railroad pass through Peach The Havasupai Indian Reservation is wholly Springs. No road extends from the rim to the within Coconino County, Arizona. Most of the village so all access is by foot, horse or mule, or reservation lies below the south rim of the Grand helicopter. Canyon and is bounded on the east and north by Principal population centers of the region are Grand Canyon National Park. In 1944 the reserva- Flagstaff, about 150 miles southeast of the reserva- tion was designated as an area of 3,058 acres in tion (population 26,117), Kingman, about 115 Havasu Canyon. Public Law 93-620 (88 Stat. miles southwest (population 7,312), and Peach 2089) of Jan. 3, 1976, increased the size of the Springs about 75 miles southwest (population reservation by 185,000 acres that surround the approximately 600, BIA personal communication). original 3,058-acre area. The same law granted the Phoenix, with an area population of 863,357, is tribe an additional 95,300 acres of land for grazing about 350 miles south of the reservation (Dept. of and other traditional use (Figure 1). However, Commerce, 1973). _________________________________________________________________________________________________ BIA Administrative Report 42 (1978) 1 Status of Mineral Resource Information For The Havasupai Indian Reservation, Arizona Edward A. duBray and Mark H. Hibpschman MAPS The many tributaries of Cataract Canyon cut into the plateau, and occasional knolls rise above it. All The reservation is covered by 15' U.S. Geologi- drainage in the area is into Cataract Canyon and cal Survey topographic maps: National Canyon, thence into the Colorado River. Havasu Creek in Supai, Havasupai, Powell Plateau, Kanab Point, Havasu Canyon south of Navajo Falls is the only Tuckup Canyon, and Black Tank Wash. The Grand perennial stream on the reservation. Canyon and Williams 1:250,000 scale maps also include the reservation. The geologic map of PRESENT STUDY AND ACKNOWLEDG- Coconino County, by the Arizona Bureau of Mines MENTS and the University of Arizona, presents a general view of the regional geology. A more detailed The regional geology is summarized from the geologic map of Grand Canyon geology is the one Coconino County, Arizona, geologic map and from by Maxson (1969) and a colored geologic map was Maxson's (1969) preliminary geologic map of the published in 1976 by the Grand Canyon Natural Grand Canyon west and central section. Mineral History Association and the Museum of Northern claim locations and descriptions are found in the Arizona. The Bureau of Land Management areas of CRIB (computerized resource information bank) administrative responsibilities map indicates land file, references cited therein, and in other cited ownership status and land use patterns. County literature concerned with mineral deposits in road maps are available from the Arizona Depart- Arizona. M. G. Johnson assisted with the CRIB ment of Transportation. file search. Aerial photographs of the reservation area can be obtained from U.S. Geological Survey and the GEOLOGY Army Map Service. Photos can be ordered from the EROS Data Center in Sioux Falls, South Previous Geologic Investigations Dakota. Since its discovery by white men, the Grand GEOGRAPHY Canyon and its environs has attracted many earth scientists. In 1861 J. S. Newberry of the Ives The reservation is on the Coconino Plateau at Expedition descended Peach Springs Canyon to the the southern edge of the Grand Canyon and is Colorado River and described the physiography characterized by spectacular scenery (Figure 2). It and geology of this region 40 miles southwest of includes one large side canyon to the Grand Can- the Havasupai Reservation. In 1869 John Wesley yon, Cataract-Havasu Canyon. Maximum relief on Powell and his expedition passed very close to the the reservation is 3,700 feet between Mooney Falls reservation as they made a descent of the Colorado and the high point on the Coconino Plateau. River in boats. The Paleozoic rocks of the Grand The elevation of the plateau ranges from 5,600 Canyon were studied by early geologists including to 6,000 feet and is generally highest to the east. G. K. Gilbert and C . E. Dutton in the late 1800's. _________________________________________________________________________________________________ BIA Administrative Report 42 (1978) 2 Status of Mineral Resource Information For The Havasupai Indian Reservation, Arizona Edward A. duBray and Mark H. Hibpschman Walcott (1890, p. 584) measured a section at limestone, which contains thin beds and blebs of Nankoweap Valley, Darton (1915) measured one chert, substantial amounts of dolomite, and zones on the Bright Angel Trail, and Noble (1922) characterized by dense accumulations of crinoid measured a section on Shinumo Creek in Bass debris. Four members have been distinguished by Canyon. McKee and Gutschick (1969) on the basis of Additional
Recommended publications

  • Hydrogeology of Jurassic and Triassic Wetlands in the Colorado Plateau and the Origin of Tabular Sandstone Uranium Deposits

    Hydrogeology of Jurassic and Triassic Wetlands in the Colorado Plateau and the Origin of Tabular Sandstone Uranium Deposits U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1548 AVAILABILITY OF BOOKS AND MAPS OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Instructions on ordering publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, along with prices of the last offerings, are given in the current-year issues of the monthly catalog "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey." Prices of available U.S. Geological Survey publications re­ leased prior to the current year are listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List." Publications that may be listed in various U.S. Geological Survey catalogs (see back inside cover) but not listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List" may no longer be available. Reports released through the NTIS may be obtained by writing to the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161; please include NTIS report number with inquiry. Order U.S. Geological Survey publications by mail or over the counter from the offices listed below. BY MAIL OVER THE COUNTER Books Books and Maps Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water-Supply Papers, Tech­ Books and maps of the U.S. Geological Survey are available niques of Water-Resources Investigations, Circulars, publications over the counter at the following U.S. Geological Survey offices, all of general interest (such as leaflets, pamphlets, booklets), single of which are authorized agents of the Superintendent of Docu­ copies of Earthquakes & Volcanoes, Preliminary Determination of ments. Epicenters, and some miscellaneous reports, including some of the foregoing series that have gone out of print at the Superintendent of Documents, are obtainable by mail from • ANCHORAGE, Alaska-Rm.
  • Upper Paleozoic and Cretaceous Stratigraphy of the Hidalgo County Area, New Mexico Eugene Greenwood, F

    Upper Paleozoic and Cretaceous Stratigraphy of the Hidalgo County Area, New Mexico Eugene Greenwood, F

    New Mexico Geological Society Downloaded from: http://nmgs.nmt.edu/publications/guidebooks/21 Upper Paleozoic and Cretaceous stratigraphy of the Hidalgo County area, New Mexico Eugene Greenwood, F. E. Kottlowski, and A. K. Armstrong, 1970, pp. 33-44 in: Tyrone, Big Hatchet Mountain, Florida Mountains Region, Woodward, L. A.; [ed.], New Mexico Geological Society 21st Annual Fall Field Conference Guidebook, 176 p. This is one of many related papers that were included in the 1970 NMGS Fall Field Conference Guidebook. Annual NMGS Fall Field Conference Guidebooks Every fall since 1950, the New Mexico Geological Society (NMGS) has held an annual Fall Field Conference that explores some region of New Mexico (or surrounding states). Always well attended, these conferences provide a guidebook to participants. Besides detailed road logs, the guidebooks contain many well written, edited, and peer-reviewed geoscience papers. These books have set the national standard for geologic guidebooks and are an essential geologic reference for anyone working in or around New Mexico. Free Downloads NMGS has decided to make peer-reviewed papers from our Fall Field Conference guidebooks available for free download. Non-members will have access to guidebook papers two years after publication. Members have access to all papers. This is in keeping with our mission of promoting interest, research, and cooperation regarding geology in New Mexico. However, guidebook sales represent a significant proportion of our operating budget. Therefore, only research papers are available for download. Road logs, mini-papers, maps, stratigraphic charts, and other selected content are available only in the printed guidebooks. Copyright Information Publications of the New Mexico Geological Society, printed and electronic, are protected by the copyright laws of the United States.
  • Chapter 2 Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon

    Chapter 2 Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon

    CHAPTER 2 PALEOZOIC STRATIGRAPHY OF THE GRAND CANYON PAIGE KERCHER INTRODUCTION The Paleozoic Era of the Phanerozoic Eon is defined as the time between 542 and 251 million years before the present (ICS 2010). The Paleozoic Era began with the evolution of most major animal phyla present today, sparked by the novel adaptation of skeletal hard parts. Organisms continued to diversify throughout the Paleozoic into increasingly adaptive and complex life forms, including the first vertebrates, terrestrial plants and animals, forests and seed plants, reptiles, and flying insects. Vast coal swamps covered much of mid- to low-latitude continental environments in the late Paleozoic as the supercontinent Pangaea began to amalgamate. The hardiest taxa survived the multiple global glaciations and mass extinctions that have come to define major time boundaries of this era. Paleozoic North America existed primarily at mid to low latitudes and experienced multiple major orogenies and continental collisions. For much of the Paleozoic, North America’s southwestern margin ran through Nevada and Arizona – California did not yet exist (Appendix B). The flat-lying Paleozoic rocks of the Grand Canyon, though incomplete, form a record of a continental margin repeatedly inundated and vacated by shallow seas (Appendix A). IMPORTANT STRATIGRAPHIC PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS • Principle of Original Horizontality – In most cases, depositional processes produce flat-lying sedimentary layers. Notable exceptions include blanketing ash sheets, and cross-stratification developed on sloped surfaces. • Principle of Superposition – In an undisturbed sequence, older strata lie below younger strata; a package of sedimentary layers youngs upward. • Principle of Lateral Continuity – A layer of sediment extends laterally in all directions until it naturally pinches out or abuts the walls of its confining basin.
  • Havasupai Nation Field Trip May 16 – 20, 2012 by Melissa Armstrong

    Havasupai Nation Field Trip May 16 – 20, 2012 by Melissa Armstrong

    Havasupai Nation Field Trip May 16 – 20, 2012 By Melissa Armstrong The ESA SEEDS program had a field trip to Flagstaff, AZ the Havasupai Nation in Western Grand Canyon from May 16 – 20, 2012 as part of the Western Sustainable Communities project with funding from the David and Lucille Packard Foundation. The focus of the field trip was on water sustainability of the Colorado River Basin from a cultural and ecological perspective. The idea for this field trip arose during the Western Regional Leadership Meeting held in Flagstaff in April 2011 as a way to ground our meeting discussions in one of the most iconic places of the Colorado Plateau – the Grand Canyon. SEEDS alumnus Hertha Woody helped ESA connect with the Havasupai Nation; she worked closely with the former Havasupai tribal council during her tenure with Grand Canyon Trust as a tribal liaison. Hertha was instrumental in the planning of this experience for students. In attendance for this field trip were 17 undergraduate and graduate students, 1 alumnus, 1 Chapter advisor, and 2 ESA staff members (21 people total), representing eight Chapter campuses (Dine College Tuba City and Shiprock campuses, ASU, NAU, UNM, SIPI, NMSU, Stanford) – See Appendix A. The students were from a diverse and vibrant background; 42% were Native American, 26% White, 26% Hispanic and 5% Asian. All four of our speakers were Native American. The overall experience was profound given the esteem and generosity of the people who shared their knowledge with our group, the scale of the issues that were raised, the incredibly beautiful setting of Havasu Canyon, and the significant effort that it took to hike to Supai Village and the campgrounds – approximately 30 miles in three days at an elevation change of 1,500 feet each way.
  • Havasu Canyon Watershed Rapid Watershed Assessment Report June, 2010

    Havasu Canyon Watershed Rapid Watershed Assessment Report June, 2010

    Havasu Canyon Watershed Rapid Watershed Assessment Report June, 2010 Prepared by: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service University of Arizona, Water Resources Research Center In cooperation with: Coconino Natural Resource Conservation District Arizona Department of Agriculture Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Arizona Department of Water Resources Arizona Game & Fish Department Arizona State Land Department USDA Forest Service USDA Bureau of Land Management Released by: Sharon Megdal David L. McKay Director State Conservationist University of Arizona United States Department of Agriculture Water Resources Research Center Natural Resources Conservation Service Principle Investigators: Dino DeSimone – NRCS, Phoenix Keith Larson – NRCS, Phoenix Kristine Uhlman – Water Resources Research Center Terry Sprouse – Water Resources Research Center Phil Guertin – School of Natural Resources The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disa bility, po litica l be lie fs, sexua l or ien ta tion, an d mar ita l or fam ily s ta tus. (No t a ll prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C., 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal employment opportunity provider and employer. Havasu Canyon Watershed serve as a platform for conservation 15010004 program delivery, provide useful 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit information for development of NRCS Rapid Watershed Assessment and Conservation District business plans, and lay a foundation for future cooperative watershed planning.
  • Characterization and Hydraulic Behaviour of the Complex Karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA

    Characterization and Hydraulic Behaviour of the Complex Karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA

    Characterization and hydraulic behaviour of the complex karst of the Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park, USA CASEY J. R. JONES1, ABRAHAM E. SPRINGER1*, BENJAMIN W. TOBIN2, SARAH J. ZAPPITELLO2 & NATALIE A. JONES2 1School of Earth Sciences and Environmental Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, NAU Box 4099, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA 2Grand Canyon National Park, National Park Service, 1824 South Thompson Street, Flagstaff, AZ, 86001, USA *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The Kaibab Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park in the USA contain both shallow and deep karst systems, which interact in ways that are not well known, although recent studies have allowed better interpretations of this unique system. Detailed characterization of sinkholes and their distribution on the surface using geographical information system and LiDAR data can be used to relate the infiltration points to the overall hydrogeological system. Flow paths through the deep regional geological structure were delineated using non-toxic fluorescent dyes. The flow character- istics of the coupled aquifer system were evaluated using hydrograph recession curve analysis via discharge data from Roaring Springs, the sole source of the water supply for the Grand Canyon National Park. The interactions between these coupled surface and deep karst systems are complex and challenging to understand. Although the surface karst behaves in much the same way as karst in other similar regions, the deep karst has a base flow recession coefficient an order of magnitude lower than many other karst aquifers throughout the world. Dye trace analysis reveals rapid, con- duit-dominated flow that demonstrates fracture connectivity along faults between the surface and deep karst.
  • Grand Canyon

    Grand Canyon

    ALT ALT To 389 To 389 To Jacob Lake, 89 To 89 K and South Rim a n a b Unpaved roads are impassable when wet. C Road closed r KAIBAB NATIONAL FOREST e in winter e K k L EA O N R O O B K NY O A E U C C N T E N C 67 I A H M N UT E Y SO N K O O A N House Rock Y N N A Buffalo Ranch B A KANAB PLATEAU C C E A L To St. George, Utah N B Y Kaibab Lodge R Mount Trumbull O A N KAIBAB M 8028ft De Motte C 2447m (USFS) O er GR C o Riv AN T PLATEAU K HUNDRED AND FIFTY MIL lorad ITE ap S NAVAJO E Co N eat C A s C Y RR C N O OW ree S k M INDIAN GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK B T Steamboat U Great Thumb Point Mountain C RESERVATION K 6749ft 7422ft U GREAT THUMB 2057m 2262m P Chikapanagi Point MESA C North Rim A 5889ft E N G Entrance Station 1795m M Y 1880ft FOSSIL R 8824ft O Mount Sinyala O U 573m G A k TUCKUP N 5434ft BAY Stanton Point e 2690m V re POINT 1656m 6311ft E U C SB T A C k 1924m I E e C N AT A e The Dome POINT A PL N r o L Y Holy Grail l 5486ft R EL Point Imperial C o Tuweep G W O Temple r 1672m PO N Nankoweap a p d H E o wea Mesa A L nko o V a Mooney D m N 6242ft A ID Mount Emma S Falls u 1903m U M n 7698ft i Havasu Falls h 2346m k TOROWEAP er C Navajo Falls GORGE S e v A Vista e i ITE r Kwagunt R VALLEY R N N Supai Falls A Encantada C iv o Y R nt Butte W d u e a O G g lor Supai 2159ft Unpaved roads are North Rim wa 6377ft r o N K h C Reservations required.
  • Michael Kenney Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon

    Michael Kenney Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon

    Michael Kenney Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the Grand Canyon The Paleozoic Era spans about 250 Myrs of Earth History from 541 Ma to 254 Ma (Figure 1). Within Grand Canyon National Park, there is a fragmented record of this time, which has undergone little to no deformation. These still relatively flat-lying, stratified layers, have been the focus of over 100 years of geologic studies. Much of what we know today began with the work of famed naturalist and geologist, Edwin Mckee (Beus and Middleton, 2003). His work, in addition to those before and after, have led to a greater understanding of sedimentation processes, fossil preservation, the evolution of life, and the drastic changes to Earth’s climate during the Paleozoic. This paper seeks to summarize, generally, the Paleozoic strata, the environments in which they were deposited, and the sources from which the sediments were derived. Tapeats Sandstone (~525 Ma – 515 Ma) The Tapeats Sandstone is a buff colored, quartz-rich sandstone and conglomerate, deposited unconformably on the Grand Canyon Supergroup and Vishnu metamorphic basement (Middleton and Elliott, 2003). Thickness varies from ~100 m to ~350 m depending on the paleotopography of the basement rocks upon which the sandstone was deposited. The base of the unit contains the highest abundance of conglomerates. Cobbles and pebbles sourced from the underlying basement rocks are common in the basal unit. Grain size and bed thickness thins upwards (Middleton and Elliott, 2003). Common sedimentary structures include planar and trough cross-bedding, which both decrease in thickness up-sequence. Fossils are rare but within the upper part of the sequence, body fossils date to the early Cambrian (Middleton and Elliott, 2003).
  • Quantifying the Base Flow of the Colorado River: Its Importance in Sustaining Perennial Flow in Northern Arizona And

    Quantifying the Base Flow of the Colorado River: Its Importance in Sustaining Perennial Flow in Northern Arizona And

    1 * This paper is under review for publication in Hydrogeology Journal as well as a chapter in my soon to be published 2 master’s thesis. 3 4 Quantifying the base flow of the Colorado River: its importance in sustaining perennial flow in northern Arizona and 5 southern Utah 6 7 Riley K. Swanson1* 8 Abraham E. Springer1 9 David K. Kreamer2 10 Benjamin W. Tobin3 11 Denielle M. Perry1 12 13 1. School of Earth and Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, US 14 email: [email protected] 15 2. Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, US 16 3. Kentucky Geological Survey, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, US 17 *corresponding author 18 19 Abstract 20 Water in the Colorado River is known to be a highly over-allocated resource, yet decision makers fail to consider, in 21 their management efforts, one of the most important contributions to the existing water in the river, groundwater. This 22 failure may result from the contrasting results of base flow studies conducted on the amount of streamflow into the 23 Colorado River sourced from groundwater. Some studies rule out the significance of groundwater contribution, while 24 other studies show groundwater contributing the majority flow to the river. This study uses new and extant 1 25 instrumented data (not indirect methods) to quantify the base flow contribution to surface flow and highlight the 26 overlooked, substantial portion of groundwater. Ten remote sub-basins of the Colorado Plateau in southern Utah and 27 northern Arizona were examined in detail.
  • Introduction to Backcountry Hiking

    Introduction to Backcountry Hiking

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Grand Canyon National Park Grand Canyon, Arizona Hiking Into Grand Canyon Plan Ahead limits, and avoid spontaneity—Grand Canyon is an extreme Whether a day or overnight trip, hiking into Grand Canyon on environment and overexertion affects everybody at some point. the Bright Angel, North Kaibab, or South Kaibab trails gives an unparalleled experience that changes your perspective. Stay together, follow your plan, and know where you can call 911 with emergencies. Turning around may be your best decision. Knowledge, preparation, and a good plan are your keys to For information about Leave No Trace strategies, hiking tips, success. Be honest about your health and fitness, know your closures, roads, trails, and permits, visit go.nps.gov/grca- backcountry. Warning While Hiking BALANCE FOOD AND WATER Hiking to the river and back in one • Do not force fluids. Drink water when day is not recommended due to you are thirsty, and stop when you are long distance, extreme temperature quenched. Over-hydration may lead to a changes, and an approximately 5,000- life-threatening electrolyte disorder called foot (1,500 m) elevation change each hyponatremia. way. RESTORE YOUR ENERGY If you think you have the fitness and • Eat double your normal intake of expertise to attempt this extremely carbohydrates and salty foods. Calories strenuous hike, please seek the advice play an important role in regulating body of a park ranger at the Backcountry temperature, and hiking suppresses your Information Center. appetite. TAKE CARE OF YOUR BODY Know how to rescue yourself.
  • Clear-Water Tributaries of the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon, Arizona: Stream Ecology and the Potential Impacts of Managed Flow by René E

    Clear-Water Tributaries of the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon, Arizona: Stream Ecology and the Potential Impacts of Managed Flow by René E

    Clear-water tributaries of the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon, Arizona: stream ecology and the potential impacts of managed flow by René E. Henery ABSTRACT Heightened attention to the sediment budget for the Colorado River systerm in Grand Canyon Arizona, and the importance of the turbid tributaries for delivering sediment has resulted in the clear-water tributaries being overlooked by scientists and managers alike. Existing research suggests that clear-water tributaries are remnant ecosystems, offering unique biotic communities and natural flow patterns. These highly productive environments provide important spawning, rearing and foraging habitat for native fishes. Additionally, clear water tributaries provide both fish and birds with refuge from high flows and turbid conditions in the Colorado River. Current flow management in the Grand Canyon including beach building managed floods and daily flow oscillations targeting the trout population and invasive vegetation has created intense disturbance in the Colorado mainstem. This unprecedented level of disturbance in the mainstem has the potential to disrupt tributary ecology and increase pressures on native fishes. Among the most likely and potentially devastating of these pressures is the colonization of tributaries by predatory non-native species. Through focused conservation and management tributaries could play an important role in the protection of the Grand Canyon’s native fishes. INTRODUCTION More than 490 ephemeral and 40 perennial tributaries join the Colorado River in the 425 km stretch between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead. Of the perennial tributaries in the Grand Canyon, only a small number including the Paria River, the Little Colorado River and Kanab Creek drain large watersheds and deliver large quantities of sediment to the Colorado River mainstem (Oberlin et al.
  • From Its Headwaters Until It Reaches Fossil

    From Its Headwaters Until It Reaches Fossil

    Fossil Creek: Restoring a Unique Ecosystem Item Type text; Proceedings Authors Matthews, Elizabeth; Cain, Tom; Loomis, Grant; Stefferud, Jerome; Martin, Rich Publisher Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science Journal Hydrology and Water Resources in Arizona and the Southwest Rights Copyright ©, where appropriate, is held by the author. Download date 28/09/2021 13:46:57 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/296468 FOSSIL CREEK: RESTORING A UNIQUE ECOSYSTEM Elizabeth Mathews and Tom Cainl Grant Loomis, Jerome Stefferud, and Rich Martine Relicensing of the Childs /Irving Hydroelectric at Irving Dam, 0.2 miles downstream from the Project (Childs /Irving) provided an opportunity springs, and is transported 10.4 miles by a series for restoration of a unique travertine ecosystem of open flumes, syphons and penstocks to power in central Arizona. Childs /Irving, located on plants at Irving and Childs. The diverted water Fossil Creek in Gila and Yavapai counties, has is eventually discharged to the Verde River at generated electricity since the early part of this Childs, 4 miles above its confluence with Fossil century. The original hydropower license for Creek. A small reservoir (Stehr Lake) located Childs /Irving was issued on January 1, 1945 by between the power plants at Irving and Childs the Federal Power Commission for a 50 -year provides a 3 -day supply of water to Childs period. In 1994, Arizona Public Service Compa- when the diversion system in the upper wat- ny (APS) applied to the Federal Energy Regula- ershed is shut down. tory Commission (FERC) to relicense the project. The power plants at Irving and Childs have a The relicensing and associated environmental combined generating capacity of 4.2 megawatts assessment process provided a rare opportunity and produce 37,000 mwhrs per year, enough to restore a unique, but degraded travertine power to sustain about 4,000 homes.